Never a bad idea to buy a good stock after a flood of bad press. I’m too lazy to do individual stocks these days but if I wasn’t I’d have been looking for a nice panic induced dip to buy into.

@Stanley_4 

Ha ha…

After I submitted the post I realized that using the word “Invest” might lead people to think I was referring to Sonos stock rather than buying its speakers. Oh well

Sadly it looks like Sonos speaker prices aren’t showing a dip.

Maybe not sadly, the spouse has not retracted her pain and regret position until I actually have a room that could use another speaker. :-)

Hi AjTrek1.  I’m not sure you made a very convincing argument for the safety of buying into the Sonos ecosystem.  You have very high-end hardware (phone and routers) which obviously help it all to run smoothly in your environment.  The reality is that Sonos need to be able to operate in “real-world” network environments like it used to.

Maybe the new app/architecture will get there, maybe not.  I certainly hope they are investing in some janky second-hand network gear and phones to set up some more life-like testing environments in their R&D labs.  It is no good testing new architectures like this on the latest and greatest hardware.

Personally, I think they will eventually get there, although my money would be on them abandoning the new app and fixing the old app so that they can use it as a solid base for future development.  And firing the person who first said loudly that “this app code is too messy to support future development, let’s start from scratch” .

Thank you for your thoughts and video. Looks to work nicely. I think a quality Wi-Fi and network is essential now as you mention. Let’s hope the system could also work better on current setups in the future for those that have been affected (my 7-year-old router is still going strong).

So far I have found one feature that is better in the new app compared to the old app. That’s the System controls view (Swipe up on the Now Playing bar) where you can start/stop play in multiple rooms in that single UI. In the old 16.1 app I need to tap to go to the individual room view to start/stop (or have never used a similar view if it exists). Improvements to the Sonos Voice Control are also good. 

By the way, when I’ve needed to screen record on iPhone, I’ve found this useful to record and show also the touches. There still may not be a better way in iOS:

 or similar in writing: https://support.screenpal.com/portal/en/kb/articles/show-finger-taps-when-recording-your-screen-on-ios

Hi @ernmalley 

Thanks for your comments. However, I’m not sure what you mean about Sonos testing the app in “real-world” situations (I assume you mean network configurations)? 

My network hardware while offering a few more options to “tweak it” is no different from any router (or out-of-the-box Mesh network setup) on today’s market that is Wi-Fi 6. 

Quite frankly no one needs Wi-Fi 6 unless they have devices that can connect to Wi-Fi 6 and/or Wi-Fi 6e. I own several devices that can connect to the higher band widths, but they have nothing to do with Sonos.

Below is a table that explains past and future generations of the Wi-Fi standard.

With the exception of Wi-Fi standard 802.11a Sonos will operate on any Wi-Fi standard of 802.11g and above. This link details the Supported Wi-Fi modes and security standards for Sonos products.

Before I continue let me provide a little history on Sonos and Wi-Fi networks…

When I purchased my first Sonos gear dating back to the Play:5, (gen 1) Play:3, Play:1 and Sub (gen 1) Sonos did not advocate operating over home Wi-Fi. Although the 802.11g standard existed; network hardware such as routers did not contain the processing power to sustain a “chatty” system like Sonos. 

To overcome the issue of less than capable network hardware Sonos introduced the “Bridge” which created the SonosNet; which I described in my original post in this thread. The Bridge eventually gave way to the “Boost” which has also been discontinued. The Bridge and Boost both sold for $99 USD.

Consumers are a finicky breed as they always want more. The complaints back then mainly revolved around the issue of having to purchase a Bridge or Boost to have a stable Sonos system when it was advertised as a Wi-Fi speaker system. You may recall that I mentioned that Sonos places a lot of strain on a network being “chatty”. My point being that one Sonos speaker on home Wi-Fi would most likely work issue free. Start adding additional speakers throughout one’s environment and that’s when things became less than perfect on home Wi-Fi. Ergo the suggestion to use a Bridge or Boost.

With the advent of improved network hardware Sonos gradually moved away from the Boost and allowed its system to embrace home Wi-Fi. That’s when Sonos first started to expose the weaknesses in some home Wi-Fi setups.

Consumers wanted Brand A as a router and Brand B as a range extender/access point. Sonos doesn’t play well in those environments; nor Powerline internet/Wi-Fi. Can you imagine the infinite number of network configurations in the “real-world”.

So, getting back to your suggestion that Sonos to accurately fix the app…

• “I certainly hope they are investing in some janky second-hand network gear and phones to set up some more life-like testing environments in their R&D labs.  It is no good testing new architectures like this on the latest and greatest hardware”

What would be your recommendation for Sonos to invest in for accurate testing in terms of equipment? I know that’s a loaded question.

The bottom-line is that Sonos IMO will test their system using the available networking hardware on the market today. Maybe, Sonos will be able to make generic hardware recommendations such as a router should contain a processor that is “X”. If that’s possible. 

I don’t by any stretch of the imagination pretend to have the answer as to how Sonos should test the app and under what conditions. All that I know is that Sonos needs to fix things with the App in the right way and stay the path to resolve issues and restore missing features. Also continued transparency during the process directed to its customer base is paramount as well. 

I still believe buying Sonos gear is a viable option. Potential buyers need education on the fact that deployment of Sonos on their home network is not as simple as connecting a cell phone. Sonos will be (and is) much more demanding.

Hi AjTrek1,

AjTrek1 said...

Thanks for your comments. However, I’m not sure what you mean about Sonos testing the app in “real-world” situations (I assume you mean network configurations)? 

Hmmm.  Let me just scroll up the page a bit to see what I actually said…   Here it is, it looks like I said

The reality is that Sonos need to be able to operate in “real-world” network environments like it used to.

So, no need to assume, because that is exactly what I said.

Also, the history lesson about the old days of Sonos is irrelevant to anyone new entering the ecosystem.

My point about testing on janky old network configurations is simply because that is what most potential Sonos consumers will have.  Personally, my own single router is over five years old.  Sonos certainly should not limit their testing to “available networking hardware on the market today”.  Doing that will mask problems with their chatty speakers, especially as they seem to be getting much chattier.

Software developers working on fast hardware and network environments are the root cause of many issues with applications when they hit the real world.  I used to be a developer myself.  If I was running the dev team I would be trying to throttle their network throughput to force them to develop solutions that will work in a lowest-common-denominator environment.  I would also be turning network devices off occasionally to make sure that recovery from loss of network situations is smooth.

Aside from the above though, I basically agree with you.  I think it is probably safe to enter the ecosystem, because Sonos will eventually fix the problems.  But potential new buyers should be made very aware that at the moment, the more Sonos speakers they put into their home, the more likely they are to have problems.  Especially if their network gear is getting old.

What annoys me most about the current app situation is the arrogance of Sonos management in rolling it out in the first place.  I think this is what happens when you get MBA and Marketing dudes running a company that was founded by Engineers.

My point about testing on janky old network configurations is simply because that is what most potential Sonos consumers will have.  Personally, my own single router is over five years old.  Sonos certainly should not limit their testing to “available networking hardware on the market today”.  Doing that will mask problems with their chatty speakers, especially as they seem to be getting much chattier.

Hi @ernmalley, you are far more correct than you may realize! The majority of Sonos gear sold today uses 802.11n (aka Wi-Fi 4) rolled out in 2009. Just a few contemporary Sonos products use 802.11ac (aka Wi-Fi 5) rolled out in 2013. Sonos doc for reference …

https://support.sonos.com/en/article/supported-wifi-modes-and-security-standards-for-sonos-products

Virtually every Wi-Fi router sold today is 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6) or 802.11be (Wi-Fi 7). The point here is that none of the improvements baked into Wi-Fi 6 or 7 can be used with Sonos devices. The ‘good’ news is this greatly simplifies testing as every Wi-Fi router shipped in the past decade will be operating in legacy compatibility with Wi-Fi 4 and 5.

Happily mesh Wi-Fi is backward compatible with the legacy protocols. This is super-helpful as you correctly note that the new device firmware APIs are much chattier and challenge the maximum bandwidth of 802.11n, so long as Sonos devices are “spread across” multiple mesh satellites.

Bottom line: regardless of the ‘newness’ of your Wi-Fi router, as far as Sonos devices are concerned it is operating as a 2009 vintage Wi-Fi 4 router.

Tagging @sigh as a h/t to his ongoing great analysis.

Here in the UK, if you buy a decent broadband connection, the ISP should provide decent whole home WiFi as an option, and even guarantee the whole home WiFi. This is in the ISPs interest as they don’t want customers calling their call centres, so they provide a whole home WiFi, rather than letting their customer go out and buy some random $20 ‘WiFi extender’ and possibly make the network worse.

Investing money in a multi room music system, but not investing in reasonable quality ‘interconnects’ (local WiFi) does not make sense to me. I want to get the best out of my music system, and other devices that connect to my WiFi.

And where would you place devices like Echo? Bluesound? WiiM? Yamaha Musiccast?

Hi @Kumar, spot check of contemporary products …

• Amazon Echo = 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6)
• Bluesound = 802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5)
• WiiM = 802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5)
• Yamaha = 802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5)

802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5) includes a number of notable bandwidth improvements, for example: 256-QAM, improved MIMO, standardized 40/80/160MHz channel widths, and standardized beamforming. 

So it seems that buying products years after they have been released or even ikea products that are built on older Sonos platforms (looking at my 5! 802.11a IKEA lamps and bookshelf gen 1) is not a good idea as the tech inside is already insanely old. I like the lamps at least.

You can also invest in Crypto today, no doubt with (misplaced) confidence. Just like Crypto, the function (value) of your Sonos (investment) may go, up or down, or even be completely wiped out due to forces beyond your control. Please invest wisely and only what you can afford to lose. And as Geoff Stelling will no doubt tell you, when the fun stops, stop. 

It’s very much buyer beware right now. If you are buying a single Sonos speaker to use from Spotify, or a TV soundbar just for watching TV, then there’s a fair to middling chance you’ll get past the setup phase and never need to bother with the new Sonos App again and just use your TV or Spotify account. 

If you’re contemplating Sonos right now as a more complex multi-room audio service where you can enjoy an evening with friends curating playlists over a few beers or bottles of wine, then you’ll be quite disappointed at the current lack of queue editing that may take several more months to appear, if you manage to get it all working how you want. In this scenario I would wait. 

A big problem, not just for Sonos, is regulatory compliance and particularly the FCC that will drive you to tears even for simple things like switching to a newer version of the WiFi card in your device.

Add in the antique Linus system Sonos is using (I think, haven't looked at the GPL stuff recently) and the effort to support new devices using it and keeping current is hard.

A interesting tidbit I ran across with the irrigation controller for my yard that offers WiFi. You have choices of plug-in WiFi devices so you could simply update the WiFi plug-in device with no certification changes needed. Similar with a laptop computer, you can often easily swap out the WiFi card to get new capabilities.

Back on planet earth, Sonos missed the promised bi weekly app update today. Makes me really warm and fuzzy thinking anbout investing in more Sonos units. Not. 

@press250 thank you.

This suggests that my lowly Echo Show units are best at exploiting advances in WiFi tech. I see this in operation, so should not be a surprise.

Preceding posts also suggest that the reliance by Sonos on its decades old wireless tech is now overhead that can’t be gotten rid of, that has now become a burden to carry as well. 

But what do I know; as a Sonos apologist rudely told me once, I know little about computer architecture or about networking.

But I do know more than many here may do, about how good wired legacy audiophile kit sounds when playing well recorded music flawlessly, on demand, so there is that. A more relevant attribute, I reckon.

FYI, I inserted the table I mistakenly left out of my second post detailing past, present and future (?) WiFi standards. Sorry for the omission.

One more point…

My gear is real world! So yes I do take issue with that characterization. 

I bought my three Asus ZenWiFi Pro ET12’s from a real store and a real online retailer (Micro-Center and Amazon respectively). The 200 feet of Ethernet cable used as backhaul to connect my mesh was purchased from Home Depot (a real store). I had BestBuy Geek Squad make the Ethernet runs and install the connectors  (which last I checked are real technicians for what they do). 

However, all said...at the end-of-the-day they’re just WiFi 6e routers (in Mesh configuration) that are backward compatible to 802.11a (which no one in the consumer market is likely to use). Furthermore, I didn’t purchase my system just for Sonos. I have a lot of Wi-Fi dependent gear that can’t be wired to a router. So, yes I require a network that can handle the traffic I throw at it including Sonos. 

This is to anyone...in today's real world even if you’re not using Sonos. In general if your router is limited to dual bands of 2.4Ghz x 1 and 5Ghz x 1 you will eventually run into problems. *

In today's real world your router should be Tri-Band.  At the very least offering 2.4Ghz x 1 and 5Ghz x 2 or 2.4Ghz x 1 and 5Ghz x 1 and 6Ghz x1. The 3rd band is important as it can be used as a “wireless backhaul” in Mesh networks to seamless connect all nodes.

One last comment….here in the USA even ISP’s are offering Tri-Band Wi-Fi 6 routers. That’s all folks! 

 * Dual Band Wi-Fi 6 routers are the exception; however, a Tri-Band is always a better consumer choice. See inexpensive Tri-band routers at this link. Remember more expensive routers typically have better processors that offer improved performance (i.e throughput).

press250 wrote...

The point here is that none of the improvements baked into Wi-Fi 6 or 7 can be used with Sonos devices

Good point.  

However, even though the old speakers can’t take advantage of the new WiFi 6 or 7 standards, I suspect that newer routers still provide  advantages over older ones regardless of the WiFi standards being used - e.g. faster CPU’s, better antennas, better coverage via meshing.  In general, the newer and higher-spec routers will provide a more stable network environment than old routers.  Hence the need for Sonos to do plenty of testing on the old crappy stuff, because that is what is out there in the wild.

A faster CPU in the Wi-Fi router makes no difference when operating in backward compatibility for the legacy protocols like Wi-Fi 4 and 5. And all contemporary routers use internal antennas that are inferior to the external antennas used in ‘old’ routers. Mesh Wi-Fi is absolutely a win, tho’ it doesn’t improve things in a testing environment where a single unit is employed.

Again, the only point I’m making is that testing with contemporary routers is legit, and it is okay if Sonos does not hunt down old gear for testing. The bad news is that all the significant improvements in Wi-Fi over the past decade won’t help your Sonos gear at all.

More about WiFi 6 benefits regardless of whether or not Sonos is involved:

• WiFi 6 increases the number of streams to a new high of 12 across the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands, whereas WiFi 5 has a limit of 8 in a dual band configuration. This increase of streams provides higher connection speed, and your client devices have more paths to communicate with your WiFi router.
• If you don't have a Wi-Fi 6 router already, you might need to upgrade to Wi-Fi 6 for these reasons: Too many devices. The more devices you have, the more congested your network. If your router's hooked up to multiple laptops, phones, tablets, and smart TVs, you'll definitely benefit from a Wi-Fi 6 connection.

Use your own judgment regarding how Sonos might directly or indirectly benefit with a WiFi 6 capable router installed on your network.

Hi @AjTrek1, like you I suggest at least Wi-Fi 6 for any new router purchase … which describes most any router sold today, I suppose.

it is worth mentioning that improvements in MIMO (higher number of streams) only applies with devices on your network that are equally spec’d. Think of it like “least common denominator,” and the same goes for other improvements like QAM and channel width.

i totally agree with your endorsement of tri-band routers when deploying mesh networking. And it is worth noting that all of the aforementioned other  improvements will benefit wireless backhaul.

https://support.sonos.com/en-gb/article/supported-wifi-modes-and-security-standards-for-sonos-products

Not sure I agree with this, (see above)

Like many on here I suspect on the back of Sonos issues I’ve been doing a fair bit of research in this area and the conclusion I’m coming to in general is … what a mess… !! 

‘Advice’ is conflicting at best. Router manufacturers tout more streams, bands and higher speeds to tempt you in, but gloss over the impact that older devices have. Occasionally, you see an article about IoT (which I guess Sonos is part of) where they say, just create a dedicated WiFi network for IoT so these things don’t clog up your main WiFi… easy right? (And it sells more WiFi kit...) 

But then more WiFi networks gets harder to deploy as you get more interference… and if you’re already in a congested area, you’re probably trying to get less congested. 

So you think, perhaps Sonosnet isn’t such a bad idea if it gets stability, but then newer Sonos devices no longer support it, so unless you’re in the Sonosnet sweetspot, you’re back into a split config which I wouldn’t be surprised to be implicated in some of the current instability …. 

Mesh in general seems like a good idea, but again advice on minimising the impact of older gear seems to centre around NOT having the same SSID for multiple bands, but router manufacturers and Apple recommend the opposite… 

At the root of the issue is the problem that slower devices hog airtime. Your WiFi may have a theoretical capability of say 600Mbps, but an 802.11a device can’t go any quicker than 54Mbps, even on a 5GHz band, so takes almost 10x longer to transmit the same data as an 802.11n device on that same 5GHz band… Which mean it starts to hog airtime. (Sonos don’t appear to like airtime fairness settings as I guess it starts to interfere with their sync protocols...)

Now we are still in the dark on what Sonos have changed that appears to have tipped many previously working configs over a cliff, but if it’s down to additional chattiness, device hogging matters. 

So sure, in theory a new shiny router offers potential, but only if you know exactly what is attached where.

I’m beginning to wonder if devices in the Sonos list (we’ll ignore really old S1 stuff) that only support 802.11a (54Mbps) should be kept on the 2.4GHz channel and not allowed on 5GHz where they will slow everything down. But then presumably if you have a group of Sonos speakers and one of that group is a slow device, the ‘master’ can’t transmit any faster than the slowest device can take it, esp. to keep stuff in sync. So how are broadcast streams handled between different bands and speeds on a WiFi network? Are some routers better than others here? Does Sonos drag the 5GHz speed down to the slowest denominator? 

Does isolating slow Sonos speakers for people with more issues (and potentially having to split networks based on 2.4/5GHz bands to do it) help at least with discovery/broadcast issues? Do systems that don’t include any 802.11a devices behave better in general because they’re operating at much higher mbps rates so hog airtime less? 

How much of the above is way too complicated for most customers so is effectively irrelevant anyway? 

Depends on your view of flawlessly I guess!! Given that we’re still in the dark as to what is at the core of all the new problems it’s impossible to know or say if an all wired solution would be ok… not possible though if you have a TV surround setup though, or portables, or Era’s without dongles… 

As most systems did on 30th April?! I was just pointing out that this is bigger than just a WiFi capability issue.